Objectively heretical = explicitly heretical.  FK and I are in agreement that the statement at the beginning of Ad Beatissimi is explicitly heretical.

What is explicitly heretical referring to the objective redemption like the Scriptures and other popes have done?

Objectively - that the words themselves are heretical, as opposed to subjectively - that they were meant in a heretical way, which nobody can know with absolute certainty in one case or another, as that requires reading of hearts - HOWEVER Benedict XV gave us lots of "reading material" to leave a moral certainty that he DID intend the words to be heretical.

Even if I granted that these words you arbitrarily pick to censure as 'heretical' it doesn't follow that Benedict meant them in even a remotely heretical way.  It's you who imputes such an intention for you just admitted you don't really know what he intended.  And if you don't know what he intended, you can't really say if he was an 'heretic' or not, now can you?  And if you don't know whether or not he was an heretic, you don't really know if he abdicated his office, now do you?  

Your "cognizance" is actually just your wild imagination imputing whatever it wishes to whomever it wishes.

Believe whatever you want to believe, you have the free will - but not the right.

maybe you should try another thread exposing his other alleged 'heresies.'

Later.  It's getting late.